Congress mulls over space agency reboot

Updated 10:08 pm, Sunday, August 12, 2012

As brilliant as Curiosity's landing was, Congressman John Culberson noted, NASA's planetary science program doesn't have much to offer for an encore.

As brilliant as Curiosity's landing was, Congressman John Culberson noted, NASA's planetary science program doesn't have much to offer for an encore.

Photo: Sharon Steinmann

Congress mulls over space agency reboot

1 / 1

Back to Gallery

Mike Coats keeps a list of about two dozen programs NASA has started - and then canceled - since he commanded a pair of space shuttle missions some 20 years ago.

"It's just not an efficient use of taxpayer dollars," says Coats, shaking his head.

These views aren't held solely by Coats, director of the Johnson Space Center since 2005. He's found allies in two powerful congressmen who want to reboot NASA to make it less susceptible to political winds and remove the year-to-year vagaries of its budget.

"We're working on a bill," said Wolf, chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee that has jurisdiction over NASA. "We're trying to take the politics out of NASA with legislation that would create continuity in the space agency."

Still in draft form, the legislation would restructure NASA's management and funding to make it more professional than political, advocates say. They envision creating a management style more like the FBI, in which the president appoints the director to a 10-year term.

Under the proposal, NASA's budget would be developed with less input from the president's Office of Management and Budget. This independence would allow NASA to plan contracts across multiple years and use a process known as multi-year procurement, which saves money, allowing it to do more with less.

Coats said he fully endorses the concept proposed by Culberson and Wolf.

"We could be so much more efficient, and accomplish so much more with the budget we have," he said. "If we could plan out what we're going to have in four or five years, it would be amazing what we could do with our team."

One space policy expert familiar with Washington politics has a difficult time believing a president would sign such a bill, even if it passed Congress.

"The Office of Management and Budget isn't some independent rogue agency, it's part of the Executive Office of the President," said the source, who asked not to be named. "No president is going to sign away his or her authority to review an agency budget."

Still, something must be done, say Wolf and Culberson.

Culberson, who visited NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory last week following the successful Curiosity rover landing, noted that project cancellations are not limited to the human exploration program.

As brilliant as Curiosity's landing was, he noted, NASA's planetary science program doesn't have much to offer for an encore.

President Barack Obama's budget request for 2013 cuts the planetary science budget from $1.5 billion this year to $1.2 billion, and to $1.1 billion in the following three years.

If those cuts endure the budgetary process they would have a significant effect on NASA's ability to build probes and send them into the solar system, Culberson said.

"The worst part of the president's budget is that it shuts down the flagship missions program," Culberson said.

NASA confirmed that there is no funding in the president's proposed budget for new flagship missions and that smaller, less expensive missions would also be flown less often.

All of this means that tentative plans to return a sample from the surface of Mars, or send a probe to Jupiter's ice encrusted moon Europa, where life may live in oxygen-rich oceans of water beneath the surface, would have to be shelved indefinitely.

These two missions recently received the highest recommendation from a prestigious panel of scientists that established priorities for exploring the solar system.